[hirowla]

Hi,

I'm looking for ideas on how to handle 4 card major suit raises in uncontested auctions in a 2/1 framework. In essence, I'm looking to replace Bergen raises. I don't need all of the point ranges covered as:

• Strong hands are covered using Jacoby 2NT and splinters
  
• Invitational hands are covered by a 3 level raise (3 card raises go via 1 NT forcing)

The other question is should I bother covering all the ranges?

Any ideas?

Thanks,

Ian

[spotlight7]

4 card majors and 1NT* forcing is a very odd combination.


1M-2M is normally 4 card support with some shapely 3 card raises included.

[hirowla]

spotlight7, on 2017-July-29, 00:24, said:

4 card majors and 1NT* forcing is a very odd combination.


1M-2M is normally 4 card support with some shapely 3 card raises included.

4 card raises, not 4 card majors! Opening is definitely 5 card majors.

[nige1]

A possible 4-card raise response structure after 1♥ - ??

• 2♠ = BAL or m SPL. Then 2N = ASK: 3♣/♦ = That singleton. 3♥+ = BAL.
• 2N = SPL Short ♠s. Then 3♣ = ASK: 3♦ = ♠ singleton. 3♥+ = ♠ void.
• 3♣/3♦ = SPL. That void.
• 3♥ = PRE.

Similarly, after 1♠ - ??

• 2N = BAL or red SPL. Then 3♣ = ASK: 3♦/♥ = That singleton. 3♠+ = BAL.
• 3♣ = SPL. Short ♣s. Then 3♦ = ASK: 3♥ = ♣ singleton. 3♠+ = ♣ void.
• 3♦/♥ = SPL. That void.
• 3♠ = PRE.

The intent is to show a 4-card raise, a shortage, and the nature of the shortage (with minimal leakage when opener does not want to know). If you don't like forcing 1N (or you are playing 4-card major openings) then consider the following kind of response structure:

1♥ - ??

• 1♠ = NAT.
• 1N = NAT. NF.
• 2♣ = REL. Then 2♦ = ART. Sound. Others = NAT. Weak.
• 2♦ = TRF. 8+ HCP. Sound 3-card raise to at least 2♥.
• 2♥ = NAT. 0-7 HCP.

Similarly over 1♠

• 1N = NAT. NF.
• 2♣ = REL. Then 2♦ = ART. Sound. Others = NAT. Weak.
• 2♦ = TRF. 5+♥s.
• 2♥ = TRF. 8+ HCP. Sound 3-card raise to at least 2♠.
• 2♠ = NAT. 0-7 HCP.

[The_Badger]

Surprised Nige1 didn't mention the speciality of Acol: The Pudding Raise.

It could be adopted into a 2/1 system quite easily I feel. Simply put 1♥/1♠ - 3NT shows 4 card support for opener's major and a balanced hand with no singletons or outside 5 card suits. Usually a 13-15 count.

That could leave the Jacoby 2NT for 4+ card support and more shapely hands.

[nige1]

The_Badger, on 2017-July-29, 02:52, said:

Surprised Nige1 didn't mention the speciality of Acol: The Pudding Raise.

To clarify: pudding raises are shown by
1♥ - 2♠ - 2N - 3♥ (or more) and
1♠ - 2N - 3♣ - 3♠ (or more)

but if opener doesn't care, then he needn't ask.

[Vampyr]

Playing a 2NT response as invitational or better frees up 3M for weaker hands.

[fromageGB]

In my view you need to split the bids between hands that are balanced (at least 2 cards in each suit) and hands that have a singleton or void. All need to have some distinction as to strength. The way I prefer is to define strength by hcp, which is simple, just upgrading aces or downgrading scattered quacks as seems appropriate.

Notation: "3M-2" = two steps beneath 3M, ie 1♥ 3♣, or 1♠ 3♦

Balanced
3/4 hcp = 1NT(forcing) followed by 2M (this bid also shared with 3 card 5/6 hcp)
5-8 = 2M (this bid also shared with 3 card 7-10 hcp)
9-12 = 3M-2. This is a 4 point range which is clarified by opener bidding 3M-1 if he wishes to know; then
.. 3M = 9/10
.. 4M = 11/12 Note that with some hands you will bid 4M yourself if partner doesn't
13+ = 2M+1 which is the "Jacoby 2NT" bid. Opener should bid 3♣ with a 12-14 hand.

With shortage
3/4 hcp = 1NT followed by 2M
5/6 = 1NT followed by 2M or 3M if good
7/8 = 3M with any shortage. A GF opener can discover which suit by 3M+1 if the right suit may give slam.
9/10 = 3M-1 with a major shortage
9/10 = 2M+2 with a minor shortage : 2M+3 asks, then clubs = 3M-1, diamonds = 3M
11/12 = shortage suit > 3M : opener if considering slam bids next step to ask singleton or void, by the next 2 steps.
11/12 with void in the suit beneath M = 3NT, as there is no room to ask singleton/void in the M-1 suit.
13+ with decent 5 card own suit = 2/1
13+ without decent own suit = 2M+1 (the J2N) and over 3♣ bids the short suit.

These bids in ranking sequence :
f1NT then 2M = 3-5 (shared with 5/6 3-card support)
f1NT then 3M = good 5/6 splinter
2/1 if have good 5 card own suit
2M = 5-8 balanced (shared with 7-10 3-card support)
2M+1 = 13+ (any shortage can be bid if opener shows no strong hand shortage)
2M+2 = 9/10 minor suit splinter
3M-2 = 9-12 balanced
3M-1 = 9/10 major suit splinter
3M = 7/8 unspecified splinter
1♥ 3♠ = 11/12 splinter in this suit
3NT = 11/12 void in M-1
4suit = 11/12 splinter in this suit, except
4M-1 = 11/12 singleton splinter this suit

Yes, I think you should cover all ranges. This could be your final bid before opponents deprive you of any other, and while it may seem futile to have a 7/8 splinter, it can be important when opener is near a 2♣ open, or opponents bid and partner is game suitable. I think your invitational raises to 3M are OK as an alternative if you don't like a micro splinter, and then the 3M-2 would become 9/10 balanced.

[fromageGB]

Vampyr, on 2017-July-29, 04:33, said:

Playing a 2NT response as invitational or better frees up 3M for weaker hands.

It also weakens the effectiveness of 2M+1 in exploring possible slam material.

[Vampyr]

fromageGB, on 2017-July-29, 06:33, said:

It also weakens the effectiveness of 2M+1 in exploring possible slam material.

I didn't say it was a good method, only that it might help the OP, who is looking for an alternative to Bergen raises.

[wank]

You can play half Bergen. 3c is natural invitational and 3d is a raise. The logic being that you can often bid 1M-2c-3d with the diamond hands.

Personally I play 1M 3M as mixed and 1M 2nt as inv plus.

I think a purely preemptive raise is overrated because it rarely comes up. To be of value p has to be dealer and rho has to pass and you have to have been dealt a hand for it. It's all long odds to come up and when it does p normally has 18 19.

[jwccsllc]

hirowla, on 2017-July-28, 23:56, said:

Hi,

I'm looking for ideas on how to handle 4 card major suit raises in uncontested auctions in a 2/1 framework. In essence, I'm looking to replace Bergen raises. I don't need all of the point ranges covered as:

• Strong hands are covered using Jacoby 2NT and splinters
• Invitational hands are covered by a 3 level raise (3 card raises go via 1 NT forcing)

The other question is should I bother covering all the ranges?

Any ideas?

Thanks,

Ian

You might want to look at Max Hardy's book "The Problem With Major Raises and how to fix them".

I've summarized these here.

[mike777]

hirowla, on 2017-July-28, 23:56, said:

Hi,

I'm looking for ideas on how to handle 4 card major suit raises in uncontested auctions in a 2/1 framework. In essence, I'm looking to replace Bergen raises. I don't need all of the point ranges covered as:

• Strong hands are covered using Jacoby 2NT and splinters
  
• Invitational hands are covered by a 3 level raise (3 card raises go via 1 NT forcing)

The other question is should I bother covering all the ranges?

Any ideas?

Thanks,



Ian

Playing full Bergen raises seem to cover your questions. Not sure what problem or question you are trying to solve in a 2/1 gf framework?

My guess is whatever the issue is the good news it is probably a rare hand when the auction is uncontested and partner is an unpassed hand.

One issue often discussed here in the forums is when you do show support rather than your own good suit.

[steve2005]

mike777, on 2017-July-29, 17:20, said:

Playing full Bergen raises seem to cover your questions. Not sure what problem or question you are trying to solve in a 2/1 gf framework?

I've seen a lot of lead directing doubles of Bergen to set contract. Even lead of other suit when Bergen suit not doubled. So Bergen isn't free. Also, other uses for 3C/3D possible.

Wanks suggestion "Personally I play 1M 3M as mixed and 1M 2nt as inv plus." is fine for intermediate/advanced. ok so not perfect for slams.

Sure other methods are better but is the audience going to be able to use them?

[spotlight7]

I like 2N* to show 10+ raise with 4+ trumps.


That leaves 3m as natural 6+ invitational.


I also use 1S-3H as 6+ invitational.



1M-3M is a mixed raise 4+ trumps and @7-9 dummy points.



A limit raise with 3 trumps is 1M-2C*(GF with clubs, a GF NT 'or' a limit raise.


If partner is not bidding game, stopping in 2M is nice.

[mike777]

steve2005, on 2017-July-29, 19:03, said:

I've seen a lot of lead directing doubles of Bergen to set contract. Even lead of other suit when Bergen suit not doubled. So Bergen isn't free. Also, other uses for 3C/3D possible.

Wanks suggestion "Personally I play 1M 3M as mixed and 1M 2nt as inv plus." is fine for intermediate/advanced. ok so not perfect for slams.

Sure other methods are better but is the audience going to be able to use them?

If you have seen a lot of lead directing doubles of Bergen raises that beat the contract that is certainly a reason to look at alternatives.
I note that the OP stated an uncontested auction but regardless if you find Bergen raises or any convention or treatment leads to
repeatedly poor results as you state that is a good reason to look at alternatives.

If the OP played Bergen raises and because of bergen they got poor results, good enough reason to look at something else.

[Vampyr]

mike777, on 2017-July-29, 20:16, said:

If you have seen a lot of lead directing doubles of Bergen raises

Isn't it normal to play these doubles as takeout of the suit opened?

[hirowla]

mike777, on 2017-July-29, 17:20, said:

Playing full Bergen raises seem to cover your questions. Not sure what problem or question you are trying to solve in a 2/1 gf framework?

My guess is whatever the issue is the good news it is probably a rare hand when the auction is uncontested and partner is an unpassed hand.

One issue often discussed here in the forums is when you do show support rather than your own good suit.

The problem I'm trying to solve is issues dealing with hands responding to 1M which have a 6+ suit and invitational strength. A suggested solution to that problem is having a jump shift to show these hands (over 1m we do this already in the other minor). The catch is we play Bergen raises, and one of the bids is a splinter ask. That bid can be changed, but the Bergen raises just clash hence trying to find out if I can do without them and hence how to handle those hands that Bergen covers.
These hands weren't an issue prior to our switch to 2/1.

[mike777]

hirowla, on 2017-July-30, 06:20, said:

The problem I'm trying to solve is issues dealing with hands responding to 1M which have a 6+ suit and invitational strength. A suggested solution to that problem is having a jump shift to show these hands (over 1m we do this already in the other minor). The catch is we play Bergen raises, and one of the bids is a splinter ask. That bid can be changed, but the Bergen raises just clash hence trying to find out if I can do without them and hence how to handle those hands that Bergen covers.
These hands weren't an issue prior to our switch to 2/1.

Playing Bergen these hands go through forcing 1nt. If you open lite, BERGEn style one criticism is many hand types go through forcing or semiforcing nt.

You can also add "impossible 2s" (1h=1nt=?=2s) and Bart1s=1nt=2c=BART) to help

Handling inv hands should not be a problem.

The hole is some weak hands with a long minor after starting 1s. BART can help a bit here Rare but still a system hole.

[msjennifer]

We play the raises as have been explained by Max Hardy.In addition , we play inverted raises when Partner has overcalled in either major. All are simple and very easy to remember.